PN Balji / Guest Writer
It was a popular question to ask: Is Singapore ready for a non-Chinese Prime Minister? Mr Lee Hsien Loong’s answer was, as expected, predictable.
It is possible, but not any time soon.
Hello, what else do you expect the PM to say?
I wonder what the Singapore establishment’s thinking was when a young, wet-behind-the-years American — and, mind you,a black at that — appeared on the American political stage with an audacious message to change his country.
More than a hint came from an establishment figure, Mr S Dhanabalan, when he responded this way to a question on Mr Barack Obama’s chances in the American presidential elections: “Well, he may not even make it through the primary, right?” he said a year ago.
How wrong this former political heavyweight and now chairman of Temasek Holdings was. Fast forward a year later, and flying in the face of Mr Obama’s momentous victory and the results of two recent surveys by the Institue of Policy Studies and the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Mr Lee’s reiteration of an age-old belief must have irked many thoughtful and forward-looking Singaporeans.
The issue is not really about race. There are three other obstacles to a non-Chinese becoming PM.
The country’s one-party politics, stability and demographics.
Mr Obama arose in a country where a two-party system is fully-entrenched and at a time when the US was directionless, in a mess and when the gap between the whites and the African Americans, Latinos and Asians was being closed.
All three conditions don’t exist in Singapore.
The possibility of a strong opposition party emerging to challenge the dominance of the ruling People’s Action Party is remote, if not unimaginable, at least in the immediate future. If there were such a party with a Malay or Indian Singaporean as its leader and they had a sound alternative plan for Singapore‘s future, what is there to say the citizens won’t give them the vote.
Nothing, if the other two ingredients of instability and a more equal racial mix are present. Unless a rogue leader in the guise of a white shirt and white trousers manages to seize control of both the party and government and plunder the country, the chances of this oasis of calm turning into a ravaged city are extremely slim. So why take a gamble and test the waters with a non-Chinese leader?
As for demographics, Singapore‘s whopping 74.7 per cent Chinese population makes that gamble unnecessary.
The only disconcerting aspect in this debate is that a minority candidate who has the professional and personal credentials to be the PM won’t get that opportunity to make it to the top.
Now, what does that say about the government’s often-stated belief in meritocracy and racial equality?
Mr Dhanabalan had that opportunity in 1990 but he was ruled out because of his race. Today, 18 years later, things have hardly changed.
In a country where the government has great clout and has immense persuasive powers to change mindsets, what is needed is a belief that a truly inclusive society can only be to Singapore‘s reputation and advantage.
Who else to effect that change than a Prime Minister who gave hope to so many Singaporeans with his inclusive society speech more than four years ago?
———-
About the author:
P. N. Balji has 38 years experience as a journalist and is now director of the Asian Journalism Fellowship, a joint project of NTU and Temasek Foundation.
———
My only question is:
Why is it that in the US, they are saying “Yes we can!” but in Singapore we are saying “But we cannot….yet.”
Dear Friends,
I would first like to say, that what I am about to say is totally my opinion and that I am not an expert in politics and I do not have any credentials to back up my opinions. With that said, let me say my two cents worth, on this very interesting conversation.
Throughout, this discussion, 2 issues amongst others have come up consistently. The issue of bipartisanship, if indeed that means having a 2 party system. The other issue is of us in Singapore having a PM from a minority race.
Of course the reference point is the recent election of Obama, in the US.
Firstly, I would like to ask, even if we have a PM from a minority race, why must he or she essentially belong to a opposition party?
Secondly, there seems to be the assumption that we have candidates, who are as talented and driven and self sacrificial as Obama, from a minority race.
The PAP, has been consistently stating in the ST that it is always on the lookout for the brightest and most suitable individuals who have a passion for Singapore, to absorb into its ranks.
Running the country is not a simple job. It requires selfless sacrifice. Our leaders have to work even during their weekends, gracing this occasion or chairing that occasion. They have to consistently be thinking for us. MM once asked people to consider why he is still there. I mean, why not retire now, and retire say in Switzerland? Its not like he needs the very controversial salaries from the government. Yet here he is, even in his golden years, sweating for our country, for us.
The PAP has a tried and tested system. Our leaders care for us. There is no other reason why, they rather be here. I mean as MM pointed out, these men and women can earn much more in the private sector given their capability. With that said, even if Singaporeans want some policy changed, why cant we work within the existing framework of government? The democrats have always been there and so perhaps the people could take a chance with them. In Singapore, which is a very small country, does it not make sense to say that there is only space in one party for the best and the brightest?It makes sense for our best to work together in one framework as opposed to working against each other in opposing parties. And which framework, better than the one that has single handedly brought us here, where everyone can dream and work hard and make it rich. The PAP emphasizes meritocracy, and we do see generals and colonels in the SAF, who are of the minority race. The PAP is race blind, as the PM has said. It is then, the people who have to decide for themselves. If indeed there is someone as talented, as Obama, in the minority race, the PAP would surely have approached him or her by now. And I am sure, that, in the interest of Singapore, the PAP, would be agreeable to have a PM from a minority race. It is easier to work within the tried and tested framework for this certain individual, don’t you think?
So the questions to ask are,
1. If the electorate is race blind? ( for the government is)
2. Is there really someone from a minority race who can be compared to Obama?
3. Why do we need a 2 party system for such a small country, would it not be counter productive?
Thank you. Im not an expert, and I am just thinking aloud.
Justanopinion
53) Justanopinion
Dear Justanopinion,
You might not be an expert on politics but you sure are a very careful fellow. There seems to be a deception in your gentleness (forgive me if I sound offensive but, you know, it’s better to be truthful than to live a lie, right?).
I’m not sure if you have the correct take when you summarize the discussion as having two consistent issues, namely bi-partisanship and a 2 party system.
Looks like you prefer to set the theme for what you were about to share instead.
Never mind this, since we will give you the benefit of the doubt that you are not an expert on politics. I shall also speak at the same level. This is not to say I am an expert either. Far from it, for there are still a lot to learn each day.
You said:
Running the country is not a simple job. It requires selfless sacrifice. Our leaders have to work even during their weekends, gracing this occasion or chairing that occasion. They have to consistently be thinking for us.
Do they know that living in Singapore is not an easy task then? It requires a lot of selfless sacrifice, sometimes not by choice but by order. Most of us have to work on weekends and our family members may also work nights and weekend nights. Do they know? or do they think it is something necessary and that it is a citizen’s duty to do so? Is it more tiring to grace occasions or attend invites or to run everywhere looking to place food on your table?
You said: MM once asked people to consider why he is still there. I mean, why not retire now, and retire say in Switzerland? Its not like he needs the very controversial salaries from the government. Yet here he is, even in his golden years, sweating for our country, for us. .
Believe you me, this is his way of convincing the people but go deeper into it and ask if this is true. Do you not think the relationship between a father and a son is a more important factor to stay in the neighbourhood, so to speak? He feels he is still able to come to his son’s rescue should he need him. Stay close by. I have no doubt that money does not interest him. So, the only reason is the son. Is he sweating for the country or for the son then? You answer this.
You said: The PAP has a tried and tested system. Our leaders care for us. There is no other reason why, they rather be here.
I shall not delve too deep into this. The answers and comments in this forum is too plain to see, hear and read. Take your time.
You said: . I mean as MM pointed out, these men and women can earn much more in the private sector given their capability.
MM sure has written his own bible doesn’t he? He can point out all he wants but truth be told, how much was LHL earning when he was in the SAF. How much would he have earned should he had left the SAF to look for a job in the private sector? Now before you answer this question, I want you to do one thing. Let’s imagine his name is not LEE Hsien Loong but Tan How Lian. Now you answer.
You said: In Singapore, which is a very small country, does it not make sense to say that there is only space in one party for the best and the brightest?It makes sense for our best to work together in one framework as opposed to working against each other in opposing parties. And which framework, better than the one that has single handedly brought us here, where everyone can dream and work hard and make it rich.
Space or the lack of it is no reason why there cannot be an Alternative Party or in having a multi-party system of governance. Yes, two heads are better than one but also too many cooks spoil the soup.
So the answer to your question is, no, we cannot have the brightest in one team if the team is beholden to one manipulator. It defeats the purpose of having the brightest in one pool.
Also, intelligence is a very subjective matter altogether.
I shall not elaborate too much because of space but it suffice to say that a social worker is brighter and more intelligent than a politician with issues that deals with people’s social habits. So you see, what do you mean by ‘brightest’?
And, oh yes, I almost missed it. Is it true that EVERYONE can dream of being rich with hard work? You believe? I suggest you go outside your home or office, go find the old lady or old man picking cardboards who had helped to build Singapore brick by brick and tell them exactly what you have written here, then you come back and tell us what happened. Can I entrust you to do this?
I do not disagree that the PAP govt is race-blind. See, we have something we can agree on.
Thank you for sharing.
Cheers ;)
FACT: Two terms of the elected presidency in Singapore during the last decade were won uncontested by a former civil servant of a minority race that makes up less than 8% of the voting population.
CONSEQUENCE: Is the Prime Minister suggesting that two miracles had happened in those two consecutive elections? Has the country suffered as a result of that choice? Did we pay a great social cost having a person of a racial minority elected to the most highly-paid public office in our system? Did a field survey – that the Prime Minister has done and yet to share with us – showed that our racial-minority President has not been popularly accepted? What makes him say such things?
Does Singapore not deserve the best leaders available, regardless of gender, race and religion? Isn’t that the main reason we are paying the highest salary packages in the world per capita to our Ministers? To get only the best and not just the next best? Can some skin colours possibly be less “best” in the Prime Minister’s eyes? We are not seeing the logic here, but some true colours seems to be showing.
HISTORY: Ready or not ready, Singapore had accepted the President’s dedicated service to watch over the country’s reserve and perform distinguished ceremonial duties for more than 10 years. We haven’t seen violent objections. “Not any time soon” has been happening sooner than you think or remember.
One can never be ready for history. But some will continue to live in denial of history.
This country really has a warped and twisted sense of history and time…progress in this country happens in the most bizarre and topsy-turvy sequence – we can be so blind to what has already happened, and then when it is almost gone and happily over, realise we were never ready for it in the first place!!!
[#54 gemami]
An excellent response to #53.
I agree with you totally, gemami. Kudos to you.
So much for regardless of race language or religion I guess